MRUDULA C. VORA, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 25(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 3536/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9043 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 12-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMAN KUMAR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Transactions in derivatives
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3536/M/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 MRS. MRUDULA C. VORA, B-10, SHASHI TARA APARTMENTS, S.V.P. ROAD, BORIWALI (W), MUMBAI-400 103 PAN: AEMPV 2322J VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 25(2)(2), PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI 400 051 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SUMAN KUMAR, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 17.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.10.2017 O R D E R PER D.T. GARASIA , JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSES SEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.02.2014 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] R ELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. ONE OF THE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESS EE RELATES TO CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THERE WAS INFO RMATION FROM AIR THAT ASSESSEE MAINTAINED BANK ACCOUNT WITH AXIS BANK WHEREIN ITA NO.3536/M/2014 MRS. MRUDULA C. VORA 2 CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.10,80,000/- WAS FOUND. ASSESSEE WAS ABLE TO PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF RS.4,80,000/- BU T IN RESPECT OF RS.6,00,000/- ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDEN CE BEFORE THE AO AND THE LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) H AS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.6,00,000/-. 3. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT REMAIN PRESENT A ND NO EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED BEFORE US. THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO ALTE RNATIVE EXCEPT TO ENDORSE THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE, THIS GROUND OF THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 4. ANOTHER EFFECTIVE GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE R ELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF F&O LOSS OF RS.80,19,820/-. IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS ARISING FROM F&O TRANSACTIONS OF RS.80,19,820/- THE ASSESSEE WAS ASK ED TO FURNISH BROKERS NOTE AND DMAT ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY DETAILS. THEREFORE, LOSS OF RS.80,19,820/- WAS DEN IED. 5. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT REMAIN PRESENT A ND NO EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED BEFORE US. THEREFORE, WE HAVE NO ALTE RNATIVE EXCEPT TO ENDORSE THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE, THIS GROUND OF THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.10.2017. SD/- SD/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (D.T. GARASIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED:13.10.2017. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. ITA NO.3536/M/2014 MRS. MRUDULA C. VORA 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.